Advertisement
Private Profiles - an update on how they will be changing here
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.

Australian Open 2021

1567911

Comments

  • Registered Users, Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,156 Mod ✭✭✭✭ yerwanthere123


    :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,290 ✭✭✭ Floppybits


    Djokovic destroyed Medvedev both mentally and physically. Very disappointing was hoping Medvedev would push Djokovic all the way.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,343 ✭✭✭✭ josip


    Bravo, broj 18.
    Seeing the "da komšiji crkne krava" on here from some makes it even better.


  • Registered Users, Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,156 Mod ✭✭✭✭ yerwanthere123


    Djokovic could conceivably equal Federer this year but I'd guess it'll be next year. Probably the Australian Open 2022. At the end of the year it'll probably be Nadal 21, Federer 20, Djokovic 19 and *maybe* Thiem on.. 2 :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 692 ✭✭✭ lostcat


    Plenty of learnings for Medvedev to take away as they say, he will win a slam before too long but he was poor and well out played for most of that. One of the more straightforward slam wins for Djokovic, one thing i didn't think would happen was that Medvedev would loose the head, but he did.


    Maybe Djokovic will pull a muscle lifting the trophy or somehting to offer some on here a bit of cold comfort.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,840 ✭✭✭✭ glasso


    Except for a moment of distraction hitting the drama-Karen-bag in New York and Wimbledon being canned Djokovic would be on 20 now.

    www.buymeacoffee.com/glassopy



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,701 ✭✭✭ StevenToast


    Djokovic could conceivably equal Federer this year but I'd guess it'll be next year. Probably the Australian Open 2022. At the end of the year it'll probably be Nadal 21, Federer 20, Djokovic 19 and *maybe* Thiem on.. 2 :D

    Remember when the brits used to include Andy Murray in a "Big 4"....


    Hillarious....

    "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining." - Fletcher



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,381 ✭✭✭ dominatinMC


    glasso wrote: »
    Except for a moment of distraction hitting the drama-Karen-bag in New York and Wimbledon being canned Djokovic would be on 20 now.

    If, if, if doesn't exist.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,961 ✭✭✭ C__MC


    Djokovic will comfortably surpass nadal and fed


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,840 ✭✭✭✭ glasso


    If, if, if doesn't exist.

    which means the fed-tards will even be more bitter when Djokovic cruises past 20

    www.buymeacoffee.com/glassopy



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 692 ✭✭✭ lostcat


    glasso wrote: »
    which means the fed-tards will even be more bitter when Djokovic cruises past 20

    seriously lads, can we keep above the sub-reddit levels of debate?


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,840 ✭✭✭✭ glasso


    gracious speech by Medved

    would like to see him to go on to get his mental game in order

    www.buymeacoffee.com/glassopy



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,840 ✭✭✭✭ glasso


    Aussie tennis heads very grudgingly accepting Djokovic's thanks

    www.buymeacoffee.com/glassopy



  • Registered Users Posts: 501 ✭✭✭ hamburgham


    Notably Djoc didn’t thank the fans in his speech after their carry on.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,381 ✭✭✭ dominatinMC


    glasso wrote: »
    which means the fed-tards will even be more bitter when Djokovic cruises past 20

    Don't know why you're quoting me there, I'm no fed-tard, or even a fed-fan. And you can look through my posting history if you need evidence. I just doing see the point in indulging in hypotheticals.


  • Registered Users, Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,156 Mod ✭✭✭✭ yerwanthere123


    Overall I think it was a good enough tournament, even if both finals were duds. Osaka-Muguruza match of the tournament for me. Good to have tennis back!


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,840 ✭✭✭✭ glasso


    Don't know why you're quoting me there, I'm no fed-tard, or even a fed-fan. And you can look through my posting history if you need evidence. I just doing see the point in indulging in hypotheticals.

    it's not a personal attack on you - it's a general comment.

    it's well-known that Fed fans can't stand Djokovic and want him to fail in all grand-slams and go on about injuries etc (even though Fed is no mean man for a toilet break or assistant himself) because Djokovic has taken so many slams off him

    fair enough on hypotheticals but we all know that he had the US Open (dire final between Thiem and Zverev which was like the greatest loser final - worst ever 5 set final) and Wimbledon who was going to challenge him?

    www.buymeacoffee.com/glassopy



  • Registered Users Posts: 692 ✭✭✭ lostcat


    Overall I think it was a good enough tournament, even if both finals were duds. Osaka-Muguruza match of the tournament for me. Good to have tennis back!

    it was ok, nice to see (if not hear) a few fans back.

    Didnt see much of the ladies side, but on the mens side there were too many injuries and inexplicable dips in form from one match to the next for it to have been great, the final not exactly being a classic didnt help either. With the best will in the world, it was clear that players didn't have enough of a ramp up to get into slam condition.
    still, upwards and onwards for the year hopefully.


  • Registered Users Posts: 692 ✭✭✭ lostcat


    So. Djokovic gets to 18, cements his hold on the most weeks at No1, and no one has now won more slams at a tournament except Nadal (Djokovic was tied at 8 with Federers 8 Wimbledons).

    Djokovic has held off the barbarians, over to Nadal now to do the same at the French. And we will see Federer back in action in the meantime as he tees up a tilt at Wimbledon.

    things to look forward to..


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,792 ✭✭✭ Augme


    It will be a fascinating slam race winner. You'd have to think Nadal is likely to win two more French opens to put him on 22. Leaving novak needing at least 5. Huge pressure on him to win wimbledon and the US this year to keep pace. It's set up nicely for the next few years with this battle going on while watching the young pretenders trying to break through.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,792 ✭✭✭ Augme


    Also match of the tournament for me was Nadal and Tsitsipas. Those last 3 sets were of a really high quality.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,861 ✭✭✭ Girly Gal


    Still looks like the younger lads haven't closed the gap, will we ever actually see any of them win a slam where they beat either Djokovic or Nadal, I think they'd even struggle to beat Federer in a slam final at this stage! Another generation failing against the big 3 in slams.
    Looks like we'll have to wait until Djokovic and Nadal either get injured, totally lose form or get disqualified before we see a new slam winner.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,381 ✭✭✭ dominatinMC


    Augme wrote: »
    It will be a fascinating slam race winner. You'd have to think Nadal is likely to win two more French opens to put him on 22. Leaving novak needing at least 5. Huge pressure on him to win wimbledon and the US this year to keep pace. It's set up nicely for the next few years with this battle going on while watching the young pretenders trying to break through.
    Given how Nadal absolutely decimated Djokovic at last years FO, he really is a lock for this years. Only thing that can prevent him from #21 is an injury imo. I think Wimbledon and USO will be more open however...maybe that's just wishful thinking :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,840 ✭✭✭✭ glasso


    Few Djokovic points that I saw ->

    Came along in the toughest ever era of men’s tennis

    Won 18GS from 28GS finals

    Out of those 28 finals, 23 have been against either Federer, Nadal, Murray or Wawrinka.

    Most weeks at world number 1

    Every masters series title won twice

    Winning head-to-head records against every one of his main rivals

    www.buymeacoffee.com/glassopy



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,750 ✭✭✭✭ MisterAnarchy


    glasso wrote: »
    Few Djokovic points that I saw ->

    Came along in the toughest ever era of men’s tennis

    Won 18GS from 28GS finals

    Out of those 28 finals, 23 have been against either Federer, Nadal, Murray or Wawrinka.

    Most weeks at world number 1

    Every masters series title won twice

    Winning head-to-head records against every one of his main rivals

    You could argue that he came along after the courts had been slowed down dramatically, surfaces had been homogenised and cheatalon was common place in the game.

    People play the same game on clay, hard, grass, indoors, under the roof, whatever the conditions are.

    It also used to be the case that making the French Open and Wimbledon finals in the same year was a mammoth achievement. For a very long time, the only person to win both in the same year in the Open year was Borg, playing completely from the back of the court at the French and serve-volleying every first serve at Wimbledon.

    This situation is fine now while there are three truly great players at the top of the game, but in a few years time it is not going to be so appealing.
    It is quite clear that there are no outstanding players in the next generation, aged around 22-26, who you would expect to be coming through and challenging the top players by now.

    You could even suggest that the current top players are not actually that great, they have just been around at a time when their games are suited to the prevailing conditions and where there is such a small difference between playing on the surfaces due to conditions and racquet technology.

    That would be a harsh opinion, Djokovic is a great player, who is a mental giant but I also dont think its fair to compare Grand Slam title counts across eras because of the obvious technological changes.
    Tennis and Golf are probably the 2 games that have changed technology wise over the eras but a great in one era would also be a great in another era.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,343 ✭✭✭✭ josip


    ... I also dont think its fair to compare Grand Slam title counts across eras because of the obvious technological changes.
    ...

    Perhaps total weeks at #1 would be a better metric ? :)

    I love the atmosphere on a Sunday after the AO Open, a warm glow of happiness pervades the house and all seems right with the world once again.






    (Until the FO swings around)


  • Registered Users Posts: 692 ✭✭✭ lostcat


    You could argue that he came along after the courts had been slowed down dramatically, surfaces had been homogenised and cheatalon was common place in the game.


    It also used to be the case that making the French Open and Wimbledon finals in the same year was a mammoth achievement. For a very long time, the only person to win both in the same year in the Open year was Borg, playing completely from the back of the court at the French and serve-volleying every first serve at Wimbledon....That would be a harsh opinion, Djokovic is a great player, who is a mental giant but I also dont think its fair to compare Grand Slam title counts across eras...
    agree with a lot of this, however in terms of speed, the courts in this tournament were playing very fast compared to the same tournament 10 years ago, paradoxically this actually helped Djopkvic this year as he was serving so well.

    I think the winning the FO and Wimbledon in the same year is a good point and its why Borg should never be out of any conversation of who was 'the greatest'

    re generations, I don't even think its totally fair to compare Federer to Nadal/Djokovic, sure, they are playing at the same time but Federer is in reality 1/2 a generation older. its all the harder to compare players whos careers don't even overlap.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,861 ✭✭✭ Girly Gal


    You could argue that he came along after the courts had been slowed down dramatically, surfaces had been homogenised and cheatalon was common place in the game.

    People play the same game on clay, hard, grass, indoors, under the roof, whatever the conditions are.

    It also used to be the case that making the French Open and Wimbledon finals in the same year was a mammoth achievement. For a very long time, the only person to win both in the same year in the Open year was Borg, playing completely from the back of the court at the French and serve-volleying every first serve at Wimbledon.

    This situation is fine now while there are three truly great players at the top of the game, but in a few years time it is not going to be so appealing.
    It is quite clear that there are no outstanding players in the next generation, aged around 22-26, who you would expect to be coming through and challenging the top players by now.

    You could even suggest that the current top players are not actually that great, they have just been around at a time when their games are suited to the prevailing conditions and where there is such a small difference between playing on the surfaces due to conditions and racquet technology.

    That would be a harsh opinion, Djokovic is a great player, who is a mental giant but I also dont think its fair to compare Grand Slam title counts across eras because of the obvious technological changes.
    Tennis and Golf are probably the 2 games that have changed technology wise over the eras but a great in one era would also be a great in another era.

    The point of the slam surfaces being homogenized to the point where players now play more or less the same game on all surfaces is very relevant, (only the FO is significantly different), the players of the current era do have that advantage over previous eras where each slam surface was significantly different, so different players came to the fore at different slams, that doesn't really happen anymore.
    Also I'd agree that there really are no great players in the 22- 30 age bracket to really challenge Djokovic and Nadal, they seem to be waiting for those two to retire instead of trying to up their games to a level where they can challenge at slam level. Djokovic had broken Medvedev's resistance early in the second set today, that's too early for a top player to throw in the towel regardless of how the match is going, dig in and try to turn it around, make Djokovic earn it instead of just giving up without a real fight.

    There's no doubt that Djokovic, Nadal and Federer are the 3 greatest players of all time and would be successful in any era, the game will be all the poorer when they do eventually go. Federer is probably the most talented of the 3, Nadal is mentally and physically tougher and just never gives in, but, it's Djokovic who I think will ultimately come out on top, he has a of mixture of Federer and Nadal; second only to Federer talent wise, but, mentally and physically much tougher only Nadal at his best can match him, but, he's a better all round player than Nadal.

    I would like to see the younger guys win slams before all the big 3 retire, as the big 3 did in the beginning of their careers, it's important for the next generation to dethrone the previous generation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,750 ✭✭✭✭ MisterAnarchy


    I always wonder how Agassi would do on the modern courts and string technology.
    He is arguably the best returner of all time, he used to take the ball early, often inside the baseline and hit it very flat.
    The first player to win all 4 Grand Slam titles on different surfaces and did it back when the courts played very differently.

    An interesting excerpt from his autobiography.
    Andre Agassi vividly detailed his 2002 embrace of polyester string towards the end of his career in Open, his must-read memoir:
    People talk about the game changing, about players growing more powerful, and rackets getting bigger, but the most dramatic change in recent years is the strings. The advent of a new elastic polyester string, which creates vicious topspin, has turned average players into greats, and greats into legends. [Coach Darren Cahill] puts the string on one of my rackets… In a practice session I don't miss a ball for two hours. Then I don't miss a ball for the rest of the tournament. I've never won the Italian Open before, but I win it now, because of Darren and his miracle string.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,156 Mod ✭✭✭✭ yerwanthere123




Advertisement